Posted on 01/03/2013 12:29:36 PM PST by butterdezillion
I just found out that all the faxes I sent to the Republican members of Congress have been referred to just the 3 Congress-critters who represent me. I need everybody to contact your own Congress members and let them know that Hawaii registrar Alvin Onaka has certified to AZ SOS Ken Bennett that Obama's Hawaii birth certificate is not legally valid.
Bennett asked Onaka to verify, among other things, that Obama, male, was born on Aug 4, 1961, in Honolulu on Oahu to Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Hussein Obama. According to Hawaii law, Onaka has to verify any submitted information if he can certify that the birth actually happened that way. And though Onaka verified that the claims on the White House image are claimed on the record they've got, he did not verify the truth of any of those facts. The only lawful reason for that is if the record they have is not legally valid.
You can see the documentation for all this at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/complete-klayman-letter-to-bauer.pdf
Two other verifications (to MDEC and to KS SOS Kris Kobach) are also consistent with a non-valid record. Onaka has been willing to say that the claims that are actually on the White House image "match" the claims on the record but is NOT willing to say that the information is "identical" or that the White House image is a "true and accurate representation of the original record on file". His refusal to verify what he was specifically asked is his confirmation that those things are NOT true. It is NOT a true and accurate representation of the original record and the information in it is NOT identical to the information in the real record. IOW, the White House image is a forgery.
Which is what affidavits by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse commander, Mike Zullo, also say.
This fits with the 1960-64 birth index being altered to include non-valid records (which I've proven in an affidavit filed for a NE criminal case). And a bunch of other evidence too.
The long and short of it is this: Hawaii has officially certified that they cannot verify Obama's date of birth, city and island of birth, and parents' names. Those are critical to eligibility. With no legally-established birth facts, there is nobody who can certify that Obama is eligible, and every Official Certification of Nomination that Bob Bauer sent to the state SOS's to get Obama on the ballot are fraudulent at best.
IOW, every electoral vote that Obama got was the result of legally-acknowledged (by Hawaii) fraud.
We need the members of Congress to know that every electoral vote for Obama that they accept tomorrow is a vote to accept known criminal behavior.
Please help me get this word out to everybody, since the "machine" will only let me contact 3 people, and I've already done that. We need one Senator and one Representative to object to all the known-fraudulent electoral votes for Barack Obama.
I live in AZ, so yes I have done so. As for words, mine are not always perfect. But, I’m tired...tired of the hypocrisy...I do very well at hurling back the insult to those who consider themselves pious and perfect..A fault, I know. Something I have just began to use.
You are showing wisdom beyond your years.
BTW, for a chuckle at the universally flawed human condition, watch a few episodes of the TV series “Cheers.”
Each character is oblivious to the hypocrisy of the other characters.
The show is so tightly written that the response of each character to a situation is easily predictable, AND DOES NOT CHANGE from show to show.
IOW, find humor where you can. Consider for a moment what a GREAT sense of humor God has!
Yer after my heart sweet Jesus!LOL!
Crunch time; down to the wire.
Check out # 76 .
Contact you congresscritter tonight, all night and early in the morning..."
All it will take is a few no votes, and it gets reviewed. IIRC, I think it's one in the house and one in the senate. Anyone know this for sure? Spread the word!
Thanks, Art in Idaho. [See TagLine.]
It looks good to me; if anyone can sort of tighten it up so it’s a good letter to congresscritters it will be a great help to me and others who feel themselves unable (I do!) to write such a letter giving a succinct summary of the topic.
Crunch time; down to the wire.
Check out # 76 .
Contact you congresscritter tonight, all night and early in the morning..."
All it will take is a few no votes, and it gets reviewed. IIRC, I think it's one in the house and one in the senate. Anyone know this for sure? Spread the word!
Thanks, Art in Idaho. [See TagLine.]
As much as I would like to be long rid of obama, I have to say this one more time and then I give up.
Hawaii ACCEPTS SELF SWORN APPLICATIONS for a COLB.
obama APPLIED HIMSELF for a COLB early in 2008. HE lied on his own application and swore to it. HE committed the fraud, not Hawaii. And unless no one starts a FORMAL INVESTIGATION AGAINST OBAMA HIMSELF or brings formal charges against OBAMA HIMSELF FOR FRAUD, the statute of limitations that began running in 2008 for charging him will run out this year.
Hawaii only did what they were legally bound to do which was to issue a COLB based on his own selfsworn affidavit. The other records Hawaii might have on obama, including whether he was adopted by soetoro and his name changed, are sealed and null once he updated his own information and the only way they can be opened is if HE is legally and formally under investigation by law enforcement pending charges for deliberate false swearing, multiple charges of fraud, and a whole host of other charges that apply here, which NO ONE, including Arpaio, has had the guts to do.
polarik and that weasel hillary lawyer monkeywrenched this entire thing with the bogus forgery charge on the original COLB. It was NOT a forgery. It was a genuine Hawaiian COLB based on OBAMA’S DELIBERATE FRAUD. But polarik and hillary’s weasel lawyer so misdirected everyone’s attention that serious investigation has never taken place for the REAL charge which is what obama himself has done...and has very nearly gotten away with. In a few months, no one will be able to charge him with anything. He faked everyone out and he is winning this dog and pony show.
It’s the reason he paid all of his back fines and dropped his law license so there would be NO REASON for law enforcement to look into his background and issue a warrant for information. He covered his bases exceedingly well.
Onaka only has to VERIFY that the ap as PRESENTED for the COLB and the info on the COLB and the record obama swore to match. And that is all he has done.
Whatever you send regarding anything else is going into the circular file, and you can thank Phil Berg and polarik.
Ping to #88
Thank you so much for your passion and dedication to this issue! In the email I just sent to my Representative, I took the liberty of borrowing from your summary (hopefully without mangling your reasoning too much!) and adding some additional context. It is probably too long, but tries to tie together many of the issues surrounding the man called Obama:
Dear Representative xxx, the rule of law is a key enabler of our success as a nation. Respect for the law promotes limited government, personal liberty and economic freedom. The alternative to rule of law is rule by man — tyranny. Unfortunately, the rule of law has been under attack in this country for some time.
One of the most egregious demonstrations of this attack is the fraud and deception surrounding the eligibility of Barack Obama to be President of the US. Obama himself claimed for many years to be born in Kenya, and his father was a citizen of Kenya. Either of these facts would mean that Obama is NOT a natural born citizen as required by Article II section 1 of the Constitution.
Beyond this, it’s frankly not clear who Barack Obama is — law enforcement officials have demonstrated that the ‘birth certificate’ presented by Obama in 2011 is fraudulent, that his Selective Service registration is fraudulent, and that he is using the Social Security Number of a deceased person (SSNs are not recycled). In an application for verification, Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett asked Alvin Onaka of the Hawaii Department of Health to verify birth facts of Barack Hussein Obama. Though required by law to verify any submitted information that could be certified, Onaka effectively could not verify any of those facts. Onaka thereby indirectly confirmed (and certified) that Obama’s Hawaii birth certificate is not legally valid. The state of Hawaii has thus verified that they have no legally-determined birth date, birth place, or birth parents for Obama.
Without knowing those facts for Obama, there is no way anybody can lawfully say Obama has qualified and no way that he actually ever COULD qualify to be President of the US. To get Obama’s name on state ballots, Democrat National Committee Counsel Bob Bauer submitted an Official Certification of Nomination claiming that Obama is qualified to serve as President. That cannot be known without legally-established birth facts for Obama, and Hawaii law says the only way to legally determine his birth facts is if the record is presented as evidence to a judicial or administrative person or body.
Until that happens, it is LEGALLY KNOWN that he cannot qualify to be President. The 20th Amendment says that if the President elect “fails to qualify” by the beginning of his term, he must not “act as President.” We the People deserve to have these issues of the eligibility (and even identity) of Barack Obama resolved. YOU can enable this resolution by making a written objection to any or all state’s Electoral votes (obtained via the identity and election fraud sketched above) to the President of the Senate during Congress’s counting of Electoral votes TODAY, January 4. This action is by no means unprecedented: Electoral college votes were challenged in 2000. You can uphold your oath of office, serve your district and the nation, and make history by taking this step. Will you support the rule of law?
I got commies, but I’ll ping others about it.
Back to the thread for new keg of worms.
Whew!
As much as I would like to be long rid of obama, I have to say this one more time and then I give up.
Hawaii ACCEPTS SELF SWORN APPLICATIONS for a COLB.
obama APPLIED HIMSELF for a COLB early in 2008. - HE lied on his own application and swore to it. HE committed the fraud, not Hawaii.
And unless no one starts a FORMAL INVESTIGATION AGAINST OBAMA HIMSELF or brings formal charges against OBAMA HIMSELF FOR FRAUD, the statute of limitations that began running in 2008 for charging him will run out this year.
Hawaii only did what they were legally bound to do which was to issue a COLB based on his own selfsworn affidavit.
The other records Hawaii might have on obama, including whether he was adopted by soetoro and his name changed, are sealed and null once he updated his own information and
the only way they can be opened is if HE is legally and formally under investigation by law enforcement pending charges for deliberate false swearing, multiple charges of fraud, and a whole host of other charges that apply here,
which NO ONE, including Arpaio, has had the guts to do.
polarik and that weasel hillary lawyer monkeywrenched this entire thing with the bogus forgery charge on the original COLB. It was NOT a forgery.
It was a genuine Hawaiian COLB based on OBAMA’S DELIBERATE FRAUD. But polarik and hillary’s weasel lawyer so misdirected everyone’s attention that serious investigation has never taken place for the REAL charge which is what obama himself has done...and has very nearly gotten away with.
In a few months, no one will be able to charge him with anything. (statue of limitations) He faked everyone out and he is winning this dog and pony show.
It’s the reason he paid all of his back fines and dropped his law license so there would be NO REASON for law enforcement to look into his background and issue a warrant for information.
He covered his bases exceedingly well.
Onaka only has to VERIFY that the ap as PRESENTED for the COLB and the info on the COLB and the record obama swore to match. And that is all he has done.
Whatever you send regarding anything else is going into the circular file, and you can thank Phil Berg and polarik.
(... Also (no) thanks to a another former freeper; now I can't recall their previous screen name, but the person admitted working closely with phil berg. - According to the underground grapevine, the person conveniently "forgot" to submit Duncan Hunter's name on a State ballot, which eliminated his run for President against obama.)
Contesting the electoral vote and the 20th article are two different things entirely. If a states electoral vote is challenged successfully then that’s states electoral votes are ignored. So you would have to object on some kind of grounds enough states to swing the count below the required amount.
The 20th simply states “if the President elect fails to qualify by the beginning of his term...” In other words there is supposed to be a process by which one would offer qualifications but because we have two “clubs”, NDP and NRP, who make their own rules we are hopeless in trying to force this issue.
What does Klayman actually want? I can't decipher his legaleze, but it seems like he is ignoring the letter of verification (that the birth certificate exists in HI) and complaining that the WH copy is legally non-valid. The argument doesn't make sense.
In order to have a valid HI birth certificate the facts of Obama’s birth had to be filed with HI within a year of his birth, or he had to file for a HI BC sometime after 1982, showing that his parent was a resident of Hawaii for the year preceding his birth (which I don’t believe is true of Stanley Ann dunham). If either of those things had happened, there would be a valid BC on file in Hawaii (one which is prima facie - “on its face” - evidence and is to be taken at face value unless somebody has evidence to prove the claims false) and Alvin Onaka would legally HAVE to verify to Ken Bennett any fact submitted to him which was included on that valid BC.
If neither of those things happened, and the filing of the birth information was late or else there were major changes made to the birth information, Hawaii law says that the probative (evidentiary) value is determined when the record is presented as evidence to a judicial or administrative person or body. All other birth certificates are declared in Hawaii law to be prima facia evidence, but NOT late and altered BC’s. Those have NO LEGAL VALUE WHATSOEVER until a judge can look at all the evidence, apply the Federal Rules of Evidence, and determine whether there is enough evidence for those birth facts to be legally-established.
So if the BC is late or altered, Onaka can’t verify any of the facts on it. If the BC is valid, the facts are legally presumed to be true because the record is prima facia evidence, and Onaka HAS to verify ALL the facts on it if a requestor submits those facts for verification.
Bennett submitted the following facts: male, Aug 4, 1961, Honolulu, Oahu, Stanley Ann Dunham, and Barack Hussein Obama. Onaka could not verify any of those facts, even though he verified that those are the claims on the record they have. This means that Hawaii does not have a valid birth certificate for Obama.
Obama may well have requested a COLB in the past, but any BC he got back from Hawaii would have included either LATE or ALTERED stamps (since those are the things that invalidate a BC). That’s why he had to forge both the short-form and long-form images that have been posted online. And there is forensic evidence that they were both forged. Arpaio’s posse has documented the evidence for the long-form. I have done experiments trying to duplicate the non-distortion on the seal from the Factcheck photos of the short-form and there is no way that seal was on that paper before it was photographed. Onaka’s verification legally confirms what the forensics have told us for a while.
Obama did perjure himself in Arizona. He twice swore that he was eligible to be President. He knew he had no legally-established birth facts and that nobody in this country can LAWFULLY claim he is qualified. He also perjured himself twice in West Virginia and in North Carolina for doing the same thing. The current legal interpretation of federal law is that a sitting President cannot be subject to arrest or criminal trial without first being impeached. I think that’s hogwash (precisely because of the statute of limitations, which would mean that Presidents have a license to commit crimes as long as they can stay in office beyond the statute of limitations). But it doesn’t matter what I think. The secret service guys would never let anybody arrest Obama because that is the current legal understanding. Sheriff Joe cannot arrest Obama until after Obama is convicted in an impeachment OR until Obama is found to not be the President. I’m working on #2.
And we have the ammunition to be successful on #2, if we can convince somebody with standing (I’m thinking either Congress or somebody like Hobby Lobby) to file a lawsuit challenging Obama’s eligibility on the basis of Onaka’s verification that his HI BC is non-valid and he thus has no legally-established birth facts. Because there have been challenges that made it to SCOTUS that were not heard because Sotomayor and Kagan refused to recuse themselves, I suggest that the lawsuit actually directly challenge Sotomayor and Kagan’s positions on SCOTUS, which would REQUIRE them to recuse themselves.
Does this help explain what’s going on here?
He/she did. Scroll to the bottom of the link provided in the head post.
Can you please ping to my response to what MestaMachine said?
That's not what Alvin Onaka says in his verification letter (scroll to the bottom of the link provided above).
“Indicating” just means that it’s claimed on the birth certificate, which we also know because Onaka verified that the information on the White House image is also on the BC at the HDOH (that’s what “matching” is talking about, which is also the language Onaka was willing to use for requestors MDEC and KS SOS Kris Kobach). But having the claim on a record is not enough to establish the truth of the claims; the record they’re on has to also be LEGALLY VALID.
Bennett submitted for verification the following birth facts: male, Aug 4, 1961, Honolulu, Oahu, Stanley Ann Dunham, and Barack Hussein Obama. By law Onaka has to verify every one of those facts if they are claimed on a legally valid record.
The only one he even mentions is Honolulu, and that was only to say that the BC he verifies as existing CLAIMS Honolulu as the place of birth. If he had been verifying that Honolulu really IS the place of birth he would also have to verify that Oahu is the island of birth (and Aug 4, 1961 is the DOB, male is the gender, Stanley Ann Dunham is the mother, and Barack Hussein Obama is the father). He doesn’t, so it is clear that he is NOT verifying Honolulu as the place of birth - only that it is CLAIMED on their record, which is all he verifies about the other stuff on Bennett’s 2nd page of requests (the letter, rather than the actual application).
The only lawful reason for Onaka to not verify the facts claimed on Obama’s record is if that record is non-valid (late and/or altered), because late and/or altered records are declared by Hawaii law to be worthless. They have no probative (legal evidentiary) value of their own. Only a judge or court can decide whether those claims are true.
By refusing to verify the birth facts submitted for verification as the true birth facts, Onaka is revealing that Obama’s BC is late and/or altered and only a judge or court can determine what the true facts of Obama’s birth are, when the BC is submitted as evidence to them and they can get access to all the evidence and apply the Federal Rules of Evidence to Obama’s evidence.
Does that help make sense of this?
The 20th Amendment provides Constitutional grounds for someone with standing to challenge whether a President elect (one who has been certified as the electoral winner) has “qualified” by Jan 20th. I believe that a member of Congress would have standing.
At any time a party who has suffered particularized harm from any of Obama’s appointments, orders, laws signed, or nominated SCOTUS justices would have standing to challenge his ability to “act as President” given that he could not have qualified by Jan 20, 2009. That’s where somebody like Hobby Lobby comes in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.